1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 March 2016 b. Date Received: 4 April 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests his narrative reason for discharge be changed to conditions, not a disability, defective enlistment agreement, erroneous entry (other), or inaptitude, physical standards. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like a narrative change in order to receive medical treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs. He contends that his two periods of AWOL were the result of not being provided with the medical and mental health services he was entitled to and his fear of going to prison for stealing pills. He believes he should not have been accepted into the military for medical reasons, not been bullied for self-referral of an addiction and to stop seeking medical treatment, been given proper recovery and training before being administered a PT test, and his leadership should not have encouraged the Soldiers around him to taunt and abuse him. Also, he believes he was lied to by the career counselor at the MEPS about his MOS and the contract did not accurately describe various details of his enlistment. The applicant does not believe it is fair for him to be represented negatively on his DD Form 214. He still requires medical treatment due to continued pain in his feet and legs; however, he has never filed paperwork because he is afraid of how he will be treated. His experience in the Army has taught him that with any label, such as AWOL, injured or addiction, a person can be the subject to abuse or neglect. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (AWOL) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 May 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 June 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant had numerous FTRs, disobeying orders and two AWOLs. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 June 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 July 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 May 2005 / 4 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / None / 2 years, 10 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 6 October 2005, for being absent from his unit (12 September 2005 until his return on 28 September 2005). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $617.00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days extra duty and restriction. Four Personnel Action forms, dated between 13 September 2005 and 23 May 2007, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: from "Present for Duty" to "AWOL," effective 12 September 2005 from "AWOL" to "Present for Duty," effective 28 September 2005 from "Present for Duty" to "AWOL," effective 27 April 2007 from "AWOL" to "Present for Duty," effective 23 May 2007 FG Article 15, dated 31 May 2007, for being absent from his unit (from 27 April 2007 until his return on 23 May 2007). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $650.00 pay per month for two months ($200.00 suspended), and 45 days extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 4 June 2007, reflects the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. There was no disqualifying mental disorder or defect present. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 42 days 16 days (AWOL, 12 September 2005 to 27 September 2005) / surrendered to authorities 26 days (AWOL, 27 April 2007 to 22 May 2007) / mode of return unknown j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and self-authored letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends that since his discharge he has gone to college and is currently finishing his master's degree at Kansas State University and he has been a law abiding citizen and looking forward to a fruitful career. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c(1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, Misconduct (AWOL). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKD" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests his narrative reason for discharge be changed to conditions, not a disability, defective enlistment agreement, erroneous entry (other), or inaptitude, physical standards. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635- 200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (AWOL)," and the separation code is "JKD." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that his two periods of AWOL were the result of not being provided with the medical and mental health services he was entitled to and his fear of going to prison for stealing pills. He believes that he should not have been accepted into the military for medical reasons, should not have been bullied for self-referral of an addiction and to stop seeking medical treatment, been given proper recovery and training before being administered a PT test, and his leadership should not have encouraged the Soldiers around him to taunt and abuse him. Also, he believes he was lied to by the career counselor at the MEPS about his MOS and the contract did not accurately describe various details of his enlistment. He does not believe it is fair for him to be represented negatively on his DD Form 214. He still requires medical treatment due to continued pain in his feet and legs; however, he has never filed paperwork because he is afraid of how he will be treated. His experience in the Army has taught him that with any label, such as AWOL, injured or addict, a person can be the subject of abuse or neglect. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support these issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was suffering with medical and mental health issues or was receiving unfair treatment by his unit at the time of discharge. In fact, the applicant's two periods of AWOL, Articles 15 and numerous negative counseling statements justify the reason for discharge. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to receive medical treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160007515 3